shukla77
06-11 04:59 PM
Now people are going to use this site to sell mangos, T shirt, skirts, coconuts.... etc ..:D Thats the only thing we needed other than usual bickering..
Anybody wants Indian mangoes?
Anybody wants Indian mangoes?
wallpaper Joker69#39;s Nissan Skyline R34
vayumahesh
11-05 11:57 AM
It has been 15 days after applying I-140 under premium processing and still waiting for approval.
gctest
09-15 04:19 PM
That memo/document you pointed out is an interpretation. We have already said that USCIS's interpretation is incorrect. We intend to correct this interpretation with this lawsuit.
Infact, it would be wrong to call this a lawsuit.
We are aiming for an injunction (or a stay order) in step 1 of the lawsuit that would prevent USCIS from working on any interfiling/PD porting requests.
If the injunction is with retroactive effect, all the EBs (not just EB3) who have ported their PDs will have their cases frozen. USCIS would not be able to work on them.
The remainder of the lawsuit can take its sweet time... the injunction should serve the primary cause.
Incorrect.
Please read this pdf document
AFM Update: Chapter 22: Employment-based Petitions (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf)
Please pay attention to section (3) Priority Date Based on Earlier Petition on page 28 -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions.
For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I suggest, you talk to an attorney before using words like illegal. It may be unfair, but still be legal.
_____________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
Infact, it would be wrong to call this a lawsuit.
We are aiming for an injunction (or a stay order) in step 1 of the lawsuit that would prevent USCIS from working on any interfiling/PD porting requests.
If the injunction is with retroactive effect, all the EBs (not just EB3) who have ported their PDs will have their cases frozen. USCIS would not be able to work on them.
The remainder of the lawsuit can take its sweet time... the injunction should serve the primary cause.
Incorrect.
Please read this pdf document
AFM Update: Chapter 22: Employment-based Petitions (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf)
Please pay attention to section (3) Priority Date Based on Earlier Petition on page 28 -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions.
For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I suggest, you talk to an attorney before using words like illegal. It may be unfair, but still be legal.
_____________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
2011 nissan skyline gtr r34 v spec
h1techSlave
03-04 12:31 PM
I am NSC EB3-I 2003 PD - no change. The status remains the same.
more...
sunny1000
04-30 05:32 PM
how do u know if someone gives u red?
If you click on the userCP on the top left side on the forum page, you can see a bunch of reviews for your posts, if you have any (be it red or green dots with or without description). But, you won't know from who you received it though.
If you click on the userCP on the top left side on the forum page, you can see a bunch of reviews for your posts, if you have any (be it red or green dots with or without description). But, you won't know from who you received it though.
zCool
07-15 08:36 PM
7yg31-8hrh9
more...
manderson
01-07 03:00 PM
My wife is still waiting for the AP. The receipt notice gives August 6 as the receipt date. She called USCIS last Tuesday and was told that USCIS is running really slow and is taking 180 days to process APs. The lady she spoke to asked my wife to call back after "it is 180 days past her notice date". Her 180 days will complete on February 6. We have postponed out travel plans several times.
is this NSC or TSC?
is this NSC or TSC?
2010 3D Model of Nissan Skyline
javadeveloper
07-20 12:15 PM
Contributed $100
more...
desi3933
07-06 11:38 AM
may look big..... but if you check many thousands of these users were created during June-July2007 timing..... lots of people filed their GC and never came back to the site......
Only way to get the active member count is to send them email by admin and let IV member reply back. This is only for IV member who has not logged in last 3 months.
Otherwise, all we know is how many people signed up so far. Nothing more.
.
Only way to get the active member count is to send them email by admin and let IV member reply back. This is only for IV member who has not logged in last 3 months.
Otherwise, all we know is how many people signed up so far. Nothing more.
.
hair Stage 2+++ R34 GTR v-spec
senthil1
09-29 11:48 AM
USCIS can process recaptured numbers. If 200k numbers are in one year USCIS will plan for 200k numbers in that year.In 2000 they processed more applications after a immigration reform. One way of preventing wastage is plan to process all the applications in 11 months. If any unused numbers can be processed in that one month.
and the last recapture was a bill that was passed in congress.
efforts are on for a recapture. but the valid question raised is: how does a recapture help when USCIS can't even process 140,000 a year?
and the last recapture was a bill that was passed in congress.
efforts are on for a recapture. but the valid question raised is: how does a recapture help when USCIS can't even process 140,000 a year?
more...
lost_in_migration
10-01 10:39 AM
EB must also get some additional visa numbers from FB as an 'interest' for these 'loaned' visas from EB to FB. Now we have to finalize the 'interest' rate. How about 100%? ;)
Thanks to Macaca, now we know that during the previous years some of the unused EB visas were effectively used for Family based GCs.
My question (and suggestion) is, can the reverse happen in 2007-2008?
I know, this is an opportunistic and shameless suggestion from my part. But the fact of the matter is, we are rightfully entitled to the same number of visa numbers that we effectively 'loaned' to the FB visa category in the previous years.
What is important is that this sort of give and take can happen with out any law change. We only need to cry louder than FB folks, and USCIS may give unused FB visas to EB category.
Thanks to Macaca, now we know that during the previous years some of the unused EB visas were effectively used for Family based GCs.
My question (and suggestion) is, can the reverse happen in 2007-2008?
I know, this is an opportunistic and shameless suggestion from my part. But the fact of the matter is, we are rightfully entitled to the same number of visa numbers that we effectively 'loaned' to the FB visa category in the previous years.
What is important is that this sort of give and take can happen with out any law change. We only need to cry louder than FB folks, and USCIS may give unused FB visas to EB category.
hot skyline gtr r34 v spec 2. Nissan Skyline Gtr R34 Blue.
cheg
07-23 03:21 PM
Wow! Good for you! So when did you apply for your I-485? Please let us know the details so we can compare it with our situation. My husband is EB3 as well with PD Feb 2005 (Philippines). Thanks!
more...
house Nissan+gtr+r34+v+spec
Green.Tech
06-19 10:11 AM
Contributions have been trickling everyday. 1 or 2 contributors per day for an organization that has 30,000 members.
Come on folks, get inspired and contribute!
Still looking for HEROES to get us to $20k.
Come on folks, get inspired and contribute!
Still looking for HEROES to get us to $20k.
tattoo 1000 Hp r34 vspec II NUR
indyanguy
09-26 10:21 AM
Any reply to my original question?
Thanks all
Thanks all
more...
pictures Definition and proper use of
bidhanc
03-11 10:51 AM
I guess it's not a VERY GOOD IDEA THEN.
In all the docs that I went thru I could not see a difference between
"I-140 approved/I-485 pending and porting" and "I-140/I-485 pending and porting" (most docs refer to the latter).
I am guessing when it comes to "porting", both are the same in the eyes of USCIS??
(What I mean to ask is there any leniency with an approved I-140 and then trying to port?)
Anyone see otherwise?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
In all the docs that I went thru I could not see a difference between
"I-140 approved/I-485 pending and porting" and "I-140/I-485 pending and porting" (most docs refer to the latter).
I am guessing when it comes to "porting", both are the same in the eyes of USCIS??
(What I mean to ask is there any leniency with an approved I-140 and then trying to port?)
Anyone see otherwise?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
dresses Stolen Today: R34 GTR from
manishs7
07-20 04:18 PM
We can make video of Hilary and Obama pro statements about Legal Immigrants and then show their actual voting record...
more...
makeup Nissan Skyline GTR R34 Vspec
valuablehurdle
07-19 10:52 AM
Can anyone please post a 'sample letter' and the contact information?
I want to post a hard copy of the letter personally to the Atlanta center.
Stuck since April 15th.
I want to post a hard copy of the letter personally to the Atlanta center.
Stuck since April 15th.
girlfriend Stage 2+++ R34 GTR v-spec
luckydog
07-20 08:13 PM
If you are stuck at Atlanta PERM backlog center , please email your case number and explain them that your application has been pending for a LONG time and request them to help us get out of this grave situation. Also, please post on this thread after you have sent an email so that others can be motivated to do the same. We need to send as many emails as possible to get any positive feedback. I know that DOL mentioned that they will start processing our applications soon, but we need to keep up the pressure from our end so that it has some positive effect.
I know most of the people on this forum are not in this situation ..... but let's see how many can come out of this selfishness and help others by emailing / phoning DOL Atlanta to help other brothers who want to file AOS just like them...... When phone campaigns / email campaigns happen .... we who are stuck at Atlanta help others tooo... so let's see how many on this form help us now...
Here is the info :
email : Perm.DFLC@dol.gov
Phone : 404-893-0101
Thanks
Champak (Same as 1 and 2)
I got the following information from DOL ETA website... remember the perm.dflc@dol.gov :( is not working for any inquiry. send them to PLC.Atlanta@dol.gov :)
The following is from DOL website FAQs:
1. Where I can email my questions?
o There are three locations where you may send your questions, depending upon the type of question asked.
If you have a technical question (for example, if you forgot your password), then please email those questions to plc.help@dol.gov.
If you have a program specific question (for example, if you have a question concerning the content of an advertisement) or a policy question, then please email your questions to one of the appropriate National Processing Centers at PLC.Chicago@dol.gov (for the Chicago National Processing Center) or PLC.Atlanta@dol.gov (for the Atlanta National Processing Center). The appropriate National Processing Center depends upon the state in which you are located.
Please note: Questions should no longer be e-mailed to perm.dflc@dol.gov.
I know most of the people on this forum are not in this situation ..... but let's see how many can come out of this selfishness and help others by emailing / phoning DOL Atlanta to help other brothers who want to file AOS just like them...... When phone campaigns / email campaigns happen .... we who are stuck at Atlanta help others tooo... so let's see how many on this form help us now...
Here is the info :
email : Perm.DFLC@dol.gov
Phone : 404-893-0101
Thanks
Champak (Same as 1 and 2)
I got the following information from DOL ETA website... remember the perm.dflc@dol.gov :( is not working for any inquiry. send them to PLC.Atlanta@dol.gov :)
The following is from DOL website FAQs:
1. Where I can email my questions?
o There are three locations where you may send your questions, depending upon the type of question asked.
If you have a technical question (for example, if you forgot your password), then please email those questions to plc.help@dol.gov.
If you have a program specific question (for example, if you have a question concerning the content of an advertisement) or a policy question, then please email your questions to one of the appropriate National Processing Centers at PLC.Chicago@dol.gov (for the Chicago National Processing Center) or PLC.Atlanta@dol.gov (for the Atlanta National Processing Center). The appropriate National Processing Center depends upon the state in which you are located.
Please note: Questions should no longer be e-mailed to perm.dflc@dol.gov.
hairstyles 2002 Nissan Skyline R34 V-SPec
geevikram
12-12 02:44 AM
Thanks for your advise on paying to IV. We posted our way of thinking!
And to accomplish your way of thinking IV NEEDS DONATIONS. Not just for your smaller goals but for the overall good.
And to accomplish your way of thinking IV NEEDS DONATIONS. Not just for your smaller goals but for the overall good.
add78
05-22 04:03 PM
You are right, Ramesh, sadly people have time to check for Bill updates and get their spirits down with amendment removal news but no time to get more friends to join or contribute. Please wake up people and contribute, and persuade your friends / colleagues at work you know to join IV. I got a weird response (chat) from a close friend saying she would rather donate to Myanmar/ China victim that her own Immigration cause, but I haven't given up, I will try to persuade such friends even though that raised my B.P. Please, people who seek advice and answers, consider contributing first. Bump.
ronhira
07-06 02:19 AM
Let's focus on stratergy and plan. People will pay if they see viablity. Let's do something and funding will follow
what is "something" you want to do?
wwbd? what would bawa do?
what is "something" you want to do?
wwbd? what would bawa do?
No comments:
Post a Comment